Stop requiring artificial metrics like requiring people to publish papers for advancement or tenure. It’s like when you were in college and they required a word count on a paper. It doesn’t make the paper better or the argument better, just longer.
I find it a bit misleading to focus on retractions. Articles being retracted is a necessary thing, and there is nothing more suspicious than a place that never retracted anything.
What matters here is obviously the nature of the retractions, the source of the problem, which generally means whether it’s a fraud or not.
Who did the retraction is also important. An author voluntarily retracting their own paper is different from the journal retracting the paper.
Exactly. If the author retracts an article, I could see that they’re honest about themselves and probably just did something wrong, whilst journal retraction is deifnitely a red flag
This paper shows that the university’s with the most retractions are actually the least woke and should be the only ones you listen to
--This paper has been retracted
